Friday, October 21, 2005
That Which We Call "Porn" By Any Other Name
I don't mean this post to sound bitter at all, but if you follow this blog you know I prefer older porn movies to the newer videos. There are a lot of reasons why, but one of the lesser of those reasons is the titles these newer films carry. This is a much lesser reason why the newer ones aren't as entertaining for me, but still irksome.
Twenty years ago the title of a porn movie was going to be displayed on a marquee in the middle of downtown, and so that title had to be suggestive without being dirty. Both gay and straight porn had provocative titles, sure, but not just filthy for the sake of being filthy. They had titles you could read something nasty into if you wanted, but they didn't hit you over the head. Think of those movies you loved like Taboo, I Do, Deep Throat, I Like to Watch, Screen Play, Dirty Angels, Frat House Memories, Wet Afternoon, Playing With Fire, Deep Inside Jennifer Welles, Lollipop Palace, Pacific Coast Highway, Little French Maid. The list goes on and on.
But now what kind of titles do we get, now that films go straight to video stores where children and the prudish aren't allowed? Look at today's titles; Fuck Sluts, Cunt Hunt, Cock Whores, Cum Splatter, Hairy Men Who Take It In The Ass, Spunk Guzzlers. And then there are the Oscar worthy film take-off titles: Shaving Ryan's Privates, Sticky Business, Romancing The Bone, Jer's Ass-Kick Park, Mad Matt's Beyond Thunder-Cock.
I'm not offended by these titles, I feel they lack class, grace and subtlety. The earlier titles were slightly more intellectual, giving you an idea of what the film was about, and that said film was nasty, without the title being nasty itself. They were often clever and well thought out, not an idea someone had dead drunk at a party and pasted onto the next video that was finished.
And maybe that's my real complaint; when porn was shot on film, care was taken with the productions. They had to worry about lighting and the script and camera angles and continuity. A lot of today's shot-on-video porn feels thrown together and careless.
I wish we could get back to the good old titles. Leave vulgarities and puns to those of us who write these blogs.
Twenty years ago the title of a porn movie was going to be displayed on a marquee in the middle of downtown, and so that title had to be suggestive without being dirty. Both gay and straight porn had provocative titles, sure, but not just filthy for the sake of being filthy. They had titles you could read something nasty into if you wanted, but they didn't hit you over the head. Think of those movies you loved like Taboo, I Do, Deep Throat, I Like to Watch, Screen Play, Dirty Angels, Frat House Memories, Wet Afternoon, Playing With Fire, Deep Inside Jennifer Welles, Lollipop Palace, Pacific Coast Highway, Little French Maid. The list goes on and on.
But now what kind of titles do we get, now that films go straight to video stores where children and the prudish aren't allowed? Look at today's titles; Fuck Sluts, Cunt Hunt, Cock Whores, Cum Splatter, Hairy Men Who Take It In The Ass, Spunk Guzzlers. And then there are the Oscar worthy film take-off titles: Shaving Ryan's Privates, Sticky Business, Romancing The Bone, Jer's Ass-Kick Park, Mad Matt's Beyond Thunder-Cock.
I'm not offended by these titles, I feel they lack class, grace and subtlety. The earlier titles were slightly more intellectual, giving you an idea of what the film was about, and that said film was nasty, without the title being nasty itself. They were often clever and well thought out, not an idea someone had dead drunk at a party and pasted onto the next video that was finished.
And maybe that's my real complaint; when porn was shot on film, care was taken with the productions. They had to worry about lighting and the script and camera angles and continuity. A lot of today's shot-on-video porn feels thrown together and careless.
I wish we could get back to the good old titles. Leave vulgarities and puns to those of us who write these blogs.
